https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/usa/new-jersey/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/usa/new-jersey/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/u

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/usa/new-jersey/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/usa/new-jersey/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/usa/florida/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/usa/florida/ It looks like New Jersey was hit early on (when it was also rampant in New York) and Florida got hit later. It could be that hospitals do better at treating it now. Obviously that's speculative. But there are like 30 things I could think of that would make it difficult to make direct comparisons between states. Climate is another one -- Florida is nice all year round, so you can have family/friend gatherings outdoors. I also live in a warm state, and we've just done family/friend stuff outside, even Christmas. At this point we do things indoors when everyone there is vaccinated, and outdoors otherwise. In the case of Florida, turns out all those people that ignored restrictions and went to the beach were something like like 20x less likely to spread it than people spending time indoors. Again... speculative. Point being, you'd have to somehow have the data you need to properly control for a multitude of factors if you wanted to make direct comparisons (including some solid reasoning on what to control for).